192 réponses à ce sujet

[LinksOcarina]

BasilKarlo wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

BasilKarlo wrote...

The entire gaming industry, including gaming press is doing a pretty good job of keeping video games from being taken seriously as a form of art. With nonsense like the VGAs(having paid promo spots and ridiculous sponsorships), the general quality of gaming journalism, and an attitude of "the consumers are manic children who's opinions shouldn't be taken seriously" among those in the industry and even segments of the consumer base the industry is floundering in this regard.

To be fair, most consumers did behave erraticly regarding this, so why should we take some of those opinions seriously when they are no better than a fanatical point of view that won't listen or reason? Or worse still, mis****rue opinions into facts, and assert subjectivity as objectively sound analysis? 

But yeah, we need to definitly construct better prose and writing skills. And stop spreading lies like this. 

You'll have to explain what you mean.

The twitter and review bombing, the cupcake thing (which was kinda lame to be honest), the Hold the Line charity that reached $80,000 before Penny Arcade pulled the plug because of the misinterpreted message of the said charity, FTL complaint and constant badgering of the employees...

That is frankly not good behavior. Compound this with how people tend to push forward subjective ideals as an objective fact, and this is mostly all sides of the coin, makes it worse because then its a "us vs them" mentality. Not saying journalists are immune either, IGN is a big offender, I am saying however the entire issue could have been handled a LOT better by both fans and by the press. And the sad part is both sides have outliers that don't get it still. 

[Steppenwolf]

You're alluding to "review bombing" as a factual instance of people unjustly deriding the game. That is an opinion, not a fact. Just because a lot of people concluded that ME3 was a perfect game until the end doesn't mean everyone did. Plenty of us had problems with the entire game, right from the start.
The cupcake campaign was a good-natured but nonsensical ploy from fans to get Bioware to do something about the equally nonsensical ending of the game, which they did(sort of, but not really).
The Hold The Line thing was poorly conceived but was an attempt to give money to charity iirc so it's not as if it was some nefarious or wretched plot.
I'm not sure what the "FTL complaint" is.
And the badgering of the employees is not unique to Bioware fans or gaming. Michael Bay received hundreds of death threats after the Transformers movie was released.

The response to the fans' reactions to the ending was handled poorly by Bioware and the gaming media. Countless articles popped up mentioning alleged death threats, insults such as "entitled" and "whiny" aimed at consumers, and very little mention of actual, objective problems with the game's ending. And Bioware essentially told us to shut up and take our lumps because they're artists and we just can't understand their vision. The media, Bioware and a chunk of the consumer base focused entirely on a very small minority of the people who were voicing concerns with a product that did not deliver what was promised. It was misdirection that masterfully reduced the impact of any reasonable criticism of Mass Effect 3 and IMO did serious harm video game consumers' ability to demand quality and honesty.

Modifié par BasilKarlo, 14 décembre 2012 - 02:42 .

[LinksOcarina]

BasilKarlo wrote...

You're alluding to "review bombing" as a factual instance of people unjustly deriding the game. That is an opinion, not a fact. Just because a lot of people concluded that ME3 was a perfect game until the end doesn't mean many others didn't agree. Plenty of us had problems with the entire game, right from the start.
The cupcake campaign was a good-natured but nonsensical ploy from fans to get Bioware to do something about the equally nonsensical ending of the game, which they did(sort of, but not really).
The Hold The Line thing was poorly conceived but was an attempt to give money to charity iirc so it's not as if it was some nefarious or wretched plot.
I'm not sure what the "FTL complaint" is.
And the badgering of the employees is not unique to Bioware fans or gaming. Michael Bay received hundreds of death threats after the Transformers movie was released.

The response to the fans' reactions to the ending was handled poorly by Bioware and the gaming media. Countless articles popped up mentioning alleged death threats, insults such as "entitled" and "whiny" aimed at consumers, and very little mention of actual, objective problems with the game's ending. And Bioware essentially told us to shut up and take our lumps because they're artists and we just can't understand their vision. The media, Bioware and a chunk of the consumer base focused entirely on a very small minority of the people who were voicing concerns with a product that did not deliver what was promised. It was misdirection that masterfully reduced the impact of any reasonable criticism of Mass Effect 3 and IMO did serious harm video game consumers' ability to demand quality and honesty.

Which implies they should be able to demand anything to begin with.

Meant the FTC complaint, sorry about that. As for the review bombing, having hundreds of people give it a 0 and a 1 sentence review is just as bad as having hundreds of people giving it a 10 with the same amount of blind praise. It doesn't cancel it out, it just makes it untrusting to hear fan complaints then. And it is a fact that they did it, you can see the damn proof in the reviews left on metacritic. 

And I am sorry, but the entitlement of the fanbase is a problem because, like it or not, it exists. It's a minority to be sure, but its the vocal minority that is always heard. The media didn't have to do much to latch onto it because it was in your face for a month, good intentions or not. The fanbase could do better. BioWare could do better. The media could do better. Everyone was wrong in the end and thats the damn point, because thats what made this a mess. 

Ironically the part you're most worried about is the part that many developers are worried about. Now the most insignificant thing is making game makers tremble in fear because of the negative response Mass Effect 3 got. Look at Ken Levine when he tried to defend boxart for BioShock Infinite. Dude was harassed and people ****ed that the plain cover shouldn't inform the uninformed. And already the vote is on to what the inverse cover is. No way to prove that it's because of the outcry of course, but the timing is real suspect. 

Or how about the Last of Us. They are already calling the game sexist because the female lead is on the back of the cover. And complaining about multiplayer being in the game. 

Is that not entitlement, or am I just pointing out minor instances of people being foolish? 

Modifié par LinksOcarina, 14 décembre 2012 - 02:51 .

[Steppenwolf]

You're conflating 2 different concepts. If a consumer buys a product and said product does not deliver what was promised it is not in any way unwarranted entitlement to want a refund, voice distaste, or take action over false claims about what said product would contain/deliver. The attitude you're referring to is not the same thing because no one has purchased or played Bioshock Infinite yet. To conflate the 2 concepts is nonsensical. As consumers we have certain rights and expectations. These are not my opinions, they are laws. Bioware did make false claims about what ME3 would deliver and that is a punishable offense under US laws. It may seem to you to be heavy handed or unwarranted but under the letter of the law it is not. Lies are lies and such behavior should not be rewarded or defended. By saying that legal actions taken/complaints filed against Bioware for lying about their products is unwarranted you are promoting dishonesty and mistreatment of consumers.

Modifié par BasilKarlo, 14 décembre 2012 - 03:06 .

[LinksOcarina]

BasilKarlo wrote...

You're conflating 2 different concepts. If a consumer buys a product and said product does not deliver what was promised it is not in any way unwarranted entitlement to want a refund, voice distaste, or take action over false claims about what said product would contain/deliver. The attitude you're referring to is not the same thing because no one has purchased or played Bioshock Infinite yet. To conflate the 2 concepts is nonsensical. As consumers we have certain rights and expectations. These are not my opinions, they are laws. Bioware did make false claims about what ME3 would deliver and that is a punishable offense under US laws. It may seem to you to be heavy handed or unwarranted but under the letter of the law it is not. Lies are lies and such behavior should not be rewarded or defended. By saying that legal actions taken/complaints filed against Bioware for lying about their products is unwarranted you are promoting dishonesty and mistreatment of consumers.

The sad thing is, not everyone can agree on BioWare making false claims or not. That is where the subjectivy comes in.

Plus, considering the fact that the title falls under a EULA  and that purchasing the title is effectively purchasing the privlidge to play it under consumer law, since all you are given is a liscence of the game instead of ownership of the title, the consumers who purchased the game have less laws that allow them to make exaggerated claims that can be miscontrued as falsehoods. 

See all those false claims are purely subjective and solely based on the interpretation of pre-release hype. Thats kinda the running theme here though. Sadly, it is not punishible under U.S Laws unless an investigation is sent out which challenges the EULA. That is not going to happen because any game company would settle over go to court for that. 

As for rewarding it or not as good or bad behavior that is up to the consumers, not me. In the end I am calling it as I see it, saying that the customers were mistreating the company as much as BioWare may have mistreated you. Whether its right or not is not really the point, it is your right as a consumer to say whatever you like for a product. But it doesn't make your voice the sole governing factor, and it doesn't mean I should side with you when you, the consumers, act like an ass in the process of misconcieved factual observation. 

It's a two way street that leads to all sides being wrong, no matter how you slice it. 

Modifié par LinksOcarina, 14 décembre 2012 - 03:28 .

[Leonia]

Oh internet journalism, we may be saving the trees but we're just making stuff up now. Long live the memory of print media and accurate sources. We will never forget you.

[Steppenwolf]

LinksOcarina wrote...

The sad thing is, not everyone can agree on BioWare making false claims or not. That is where the subjectivy comes in.

The claims of falsehoods about the game are not open to interpretation. Some people saying they are doesn not make it so. Objectively Bioware lied. Plain and simple. It's a matter of fact, not degree.

Plus, considering the fact that the title falls under a EULA  and that purchasing the title is effectively purchasing the privlidge to play it under consumer law, since all you are given is a liscence of the game instead of ownership of the title, the consumers who purchased the game have less laws that allow them to make exaggerated claims that can be miscontrued as falsehoods.

EULA parameters have always been murky and have been successfully contested several times.

See all those false claims are purely subjective and solely based on the interpretation of pre-release hype.

This is one of the things that a lot of people were tossing around as defense of Bioware's lies. It's ridiculous. How is misleading consumers early OK?

[LinksOcarina]

BasilKarlo wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

The sad thing is, not everyone can agree on BioWare making false claims or not. That is where the subjectivy comes in.

The claims of falsehoods about the game are not open to interpretation. Some people saying they are doesn not make it so. Objectively Bioware lied. Plain and simple. It's a matter of fact, not degree.

Plus, considering the fact that the title falls under a EULA  and that purchasing the title is effectively purchasing the privlidge to play it under consumer law, since all you are given is a liscence of the game instead of ownership of the title, the consumers who purchased the game have less laws that allow them to make exaggerated claims that can be miscontrued as falsehoods.

EULA parameters have always been murky and have been successfully contested several times.

See all those false claims are purely subjective and solely based on the interpretation of pre-release hype.

This is one of the things that a lot of people were tossing around as defense of Bioware's lies. It's ridiculous. How is misleading consumers early OK?

Oh yes, those falsehoods are. Since we have two different interpretations by two different bureaus investigating the claims as false or not, it is a wholly subjective interpretation vs an objective fact since opinion is divided. 

It also doesn't help the U.S case that the BBB has been under fire for giving out suspect opinions and ratings based on payment, which throws their credability into question, so for me personally, I am inclined to believe the Advertising Standards Authority in the U.K on this one from an objective standpoint. 

And misleading consumers is what advertising is all about. You see it in movies, you see it in quotes and commercials and blogs all over the place saying three out of five doctors recommend this product, or this critic gave this movie four stars. Or this new music album will change the genre. All of is never fully factual, its PR fluff to get people to buy their product. It is designed to be truth enough while being misleading at the same time. Thats how advertising works, its selling you a product.

Now if BioWare said that the game had no vehicle sections and was a platformer instead of an RPG, then they would be held accountable for lying. But through PR, its a different story. 

But this is kind of pointless. In the end, no one lied and, contrary to what you personally believe, it is completely open to interpretation if they did or not. So you, in fact, are wrong in that regard. As for what you believe, I won't take that away from you. If you think they lied to you go ahead and believe it, just dont' say its a fact. That is what I object to. 

Modifié par LinksOcarina, 14 décembre 2012 - 04:58 .

[Steppenwolf]

One is only in reference to the ending, and was never meant to address to the "16 different endings" claim. And the BBB has never been proven to have broken any laws or committed any ethical violations. Businesses file complaints against the BBB all the time because the BBB holds them accountable.
And the rest of your post is nonsense. Utter nonsense. False advertising is illegal and you should actually read the list of ME3 lies before saying Bioware never lied. You are objectively wrong.

[LinksOcarina]

BasilKarlo wrote...

One is only in reference to the ending, and was never meant to address to the "16 different endings" claim. And the BBB has never been proven to have broken any laws or committed any ethical violations. Businesses file complaints against the BBB all the time because the BBB holds them accountable.
And the rest of your post is nonsense. Utter nonsense. False advertising is illegal and you should actually read the list of ME3 lies before saying Bioware never lied. You are objectively wrong.

Saying the ASA is not directly adressing the claims made by people is either you not seeing objective facts, or you just ignoring them becuase it disagrees with you. 

As for the BBB, you don't need proof of anything because there have been numerous claims and cases against them regarding shady practices. They technically didn't break the law but they are still suspect in their opinions, and holding them with a credible one that makes it ok is honestly hypocritical of what you believe regarding BioWare.

And by the list of lies you mean the list on the BSN made up of about twenty or so quotes regarding Mass Effect 3? That list, which I looked over and almost every single quote put forward is subjective in its interpretation, save possibly the A,B,C ending quote and the Rachni being involved in the game?

Face facts Basil, i'm not objectivly wrong. You are just subjectively thinking as much. 

[Steppenwolf]

By your own standard the numerous claims of dishonesty against Bioware is enough to condemn them. Unless you're using a double standard to support your argument.
I think it's pretty obvious who's viewing this subjectively.

[LinksOcarina]

BasilKarlo wrote...

By your own standard the numerous claims of dishonesty against Bioware is enough to condemn them. Unless you're using a double standard to support your argument.
I think it's pretty obvious who's viewing this subjectively.

Not really. The only thing BioWare is guilty of is by unexpecting the reaction for the game. Although they also said in an pre-release interview that the ending would upset some fans as well, which was eerily prophetic.

How they handled it I disagreed with too. But as I said, they are not the only ones to blame, which is kind of the point lost in this subjective/objective tomfoolery you keep bringing up. 

You would make a good litigator though...i'm frankly impressed at your resolve. 

[Steppenwolf]

You can't just say "Not really" and make it so. Look at your posts. You say the BBB is not trustworthy because of claims of impropriety but don't apply that standard to Bioware. It's a clear double standard.

[LinksOcarina]

BasilKarlo wrote...

You can't just say "Not really" and make it so. Look at your posts. You say the BBB is not trustworthy because of claims of impropriety but don't apply that standard to Bioware. It's a clear double standard.

No its not. Because BioWare made claims readily in the guidelines of selling a product. The BBB is set up so it can safeguard and regulate false claims. They should be put at a higher standard by default of their position and purpose.

The claims made by BioWare are, as I said several times, wholly subjective becuase of inerpretation. 

The claims against the BBB are less so since there is more evidence backing it up versus interpretation, espeically considering ABC and Sixty minutes proved there were some shady going's on regarding rating and accreditation of sites through fee payment.  There is a difference, what you are presenting is a false dichotomy.

Modifié par LinksOcarina, 14 décembre 2012 - 06:01 .

[Steppenwolf]

LinksOcarina wrote...

BasilKarlo wrote...

You can't just say "Not really" and make it so. Look at your posts. You say the BBB is not trustworthy because of claims of impropriety but don't apply that standard to Bioware. It's a clear double standard.

No its not. Because BioWare made claims readily in the guidelines of selling a product. The BBB is set up so it can safeguard and regulate false claims. They should be put at a higher standard by default of their position and purpose.

The claims made by BioWare are, as I said several times, wholly subjective becuase of inerpretation. 

The claims against the BBB are less so since there is more evidence backing it up versus interpretation, espeically considering ABC and Sixty minutes proved there were some shady going's on regarding rating and accreditation of sites through fee payment.  There is a difference, what you are presenting is a false dichotomy.

Why should Bioware be held to no standard? And again, the lies Bioware told are not open to interpretation. 16 endings were promised. They promised no "A, B, or C" ending choices. Etc. Those are not open to debate. Even if you factor in each minute difference among the A, B or C endings they don't add up to 16.

[Siran]

Funny how so many people were eager to jump on the "BioWare / EA messed up again" wagon, and blamed them without a second thought but now lack the decency to apologize. The same people who always demand BioWare should apologize for everything...

[Ninja Stan]

No longer on topic.

End of line.

[Steppenwolf]

Well, EA did step on its own feet here by confirming to a different publication that the interview was legit. I would bet the truth is somewhere in the middle with this. A Bioware employee probably gave some rough numbers and the interviewer probably decided to report it as more than it was.